Power 5 Recruiter wrote:
There is so much more scholarship $$$ in women's track and field (and NCAA athletics in general) that it has inflated the market. In no universe does a 2:12/5:00/10:50 girl deserve a full ride, yet there are mid-majors tripping over each other to throw big $$$ at these women. Sorry dudes, you were born the wrong sex if you wanted your education paid for by running mediocre marks.
I get your point, and you're right about track, but wrong about "athletics" the way it's used in U.S. (all sports, not track and field). Football is where the money is at. So, guys, if you complain, complain that all the money goes to football, not that it all goes to women track and field/xc. Not just the scholarships (85 full scholarships at 120 FCS schools, 63 full at 125 FCS schools... and then 36 scholarships at 156 Div II schools), but all the other money too.
And don't tell me that football makes money. It does at some schools, but it loses money at many others. And among those that make money, only a small number make enough to cover the whole athletics budget - Yes, at many of the Power 5 conferences, but even that is not guaranteed if they don't get to a good bowl game (at minor bowl games, teams can spend more money going to the game than they take in -- honestly, I've seen the budget of a Power 5 school where that happened 2 years in a row).
Meanwhile, a woman distance athlete is very attractive to these schools because they can count as 3 athletes: 1 for XC, 1 for indoor track, 1 for outdoor track. So yes, they can get scholarships more easily. But it's not because schools are just throwing money at them instead of the guys. They're just throwing the money at different guys.